I have to admit that I did not know what I was going to say prior to the event. I tend to react to what is being said, which makes me glad that I am presenting near the end of the schedule. To begin I need to talk about my own position as a researcher in order to understand how I have came to this position around the idea of networked politics OR as a researcher in a space where I am a active node in the network. I am concerned about space and how space is considered within the process of being human and the hows and the whys in which we interact with each other. My connections and my routes that I take as a researcher is based on the connections and the offline activities that I participate within. So to understand the context in which I exist within is probably the most important thing in increasing and disseminating my ideas around this space. Blogging (or free writing) or tweeting or letting the inner monologue run wild are a ways that I work out the idea around this area, my work and how I work conflicts with the structures of universities expectations and institutional hierarchies. Similarly, the process of listening to a personalized experience, therefore a twitter feed is a space that cannot be replicated or understood in the same way by anybody else. Although we can see networks, and visualize them with data, we cannot see or experience what that individual is experiencing through that data. We can argue that we are doing it right or we are doing it wrong. We can only speculate.

This is why I am approaching this as somebody has been nourished by the theory and critique that I have been exposed to over the last couple of days at the Platform Politics conference. It has been a worthwhile experience and I am grateful for Joss and Jussi for inviting me to speak - as this was really meant to be a poster. And I don't know *how* I would be able to convey my work and my workings out on a piece of A0 paper. Not unless it was a picture of a coffee lol. 

My PhD research is around pre-approved events, situated in a time and space that cannot be changed, therefore everything else has to move for it. Therefore, the purpose and the space of the University in the context of my work plays on my mind throughout the process which should be a structured, linear process of research questions and research results - and within a set time-frame, dictated by funding factors and approval from committees and management, positions in league tables and my own ability to pull in money to support my own research interests (and to cover bills). Similarly, for me to be here [in front of an audience], situated within this space, as a lone voice to many, has political implications and troubles me some what. In fact, I don't know what it means for me to be in Cambridge. I found myself wandering the streets with a new friend (who I met from my twitter network) until 1am trying to work out what "cambridge" is and what could be done to disrupt the pre-prescribed history of the space. I find myself working within similar external spaces in the same way that my ‘research subjects’ seek hope to find alternatives. I’m involved in cooperative education spaces, much like Michel Bauwen’s philosophy behind the P2P foundation, and I feel that I must *be* within this space, without necessarily knowing the whys behind that justification. Therefore, my paper should be seen as a story or a narrative towards something more, or perhaps an example of where much of the ideas discussed over the timeframe of the conference can be applied, rather than something of theoretical, philosophical or empirical. 

In the context of the Olympic research, the media event theory grounds the analysis of the phenomenon in historical theory (Dayan & Katz, 1994: 35). They are now so big that it is no question that it wont happen, instead it is more how it will go about happening and what messages will be transformed through the media of the Olympics (Dayan, 2008: 392) . Furthermore, the Olympics (and other media events) are used by the media to signify change or transformation. The journalists and broadcast media who cover these events are not inclined to say anything critical or indeed, analytical about the event as they must convey the privilege of being invited to cover the event - if it wasn't them, it would be another media company that gains access. To be honest, reading about this from a book written in 1994 (having approached my work from a new media background - a story of freedom, alternative democracies.) it surprised me that we still see this in 2011.  I mean, look at the recent display of power displayed through the royal wedding, a media scale of this scale cannot be disrupted. So what can you do?

For me, the Olympics is not about sport. And I guess most people who are at this event can be easily convinced by this idea as well. What I present normally depends on how much pre-ample I need to give about the Olympic Games within the group I am speaking to. It is a powerful brand. It is one of the largest brands in the world, recognised on a global scale and interpreted on a local level. It separates its self from other sporting events because it comes with its own philosophy of Olympism. This philosophy concerns notions such as solidarity, friendship and respect (you get the picture) - which means that everything the Olympic Movement does is apparently done in the name of 'equality' (pick a value. any value.) It is hard to knock an event that cares. Or at least that might be what their Olympic Program (TOP)may think (that's the corporate sponsors by the way.) 

This makes the phenomena a extra special place to assess as a media scholar. When the media organisations such as NBC which pays 53% of all broadcast revenue, and are suspended in critical analysis (like they ever were in the first place.) what can we make of a institution that can guarantee a location for their event seven years in advance of opening ceremony, securing their message and history in 14 years chunks? What does it say about the society that we live in. These events do not exist in a political vacuum - it might sound nice to talk about solidarity and respect and friendship, but do we feel so cuddly when large groups of people are being displaced from their communities and pots of money for public services are sidelined on behave of a little bit of support. Not to mention how those who challenge, occupy or disrupt that space are treated outside of the media frame. The pre-emptive arrests and removal of facebook groups ahead of the royal wedding should give us an indication of what we might expect during the Games times. That is, if we know where to look...

Similarly, the experiences of being 'within' an Olympic city during games time is an opportunity to expose some of these inequalities or alternative perspectives. There are times of great extremity - and make for an environment where particular instances can emerge, where they might not be able to emerge during other circumstances. It is difficult to behave as it if it s 'business as usual' and there is nothing usual about a mega event of this nature. It still surprises me how little it took to wipe the surface of the sport and to find something much more interesting and much more frightening under the layer of PR and media coverage.

Yet, to research activism, without encountering the feeling what it means to be active and to be political when what you might uncover has a transformative effect about how you think about the world is something worthy of a headfuck. You are within an area, and therefore a network where the politics that you assess and debate are happening at the very same time, and quite rapidly within your own system. It is impossible to remain outside of it as to be outside of is to never understand what motivates somebody to participate within these online spaces, the hope that people might feel where their messages might get out their to a wider 'audience' than their own communities or the optimism subscribed to being able to take a platform and use it in a way that is not often considered to be 'correct.'

This last year might be the last year where we might be able to discuss this openly. This year might be the last time where we will be able to have these conversations as part of an official stream relating to higher education institutions in the united kingdom. Certainly, having discovered today that I am currently enrolled at the "worst university in Britain" according to the Guardian league tables (something the university hasn't subscribed to in the past- since becoming UWS) it only makes me wish to use that position to fight harder. My three themes to address will involve hacking, disrupting and occupying - because that is what my research 'subjects' might do and the only way to give credit to the spaces and communities in which I study is to learn from them. Would I be allowed to do this at a University that was looking to maintain it's position as 'something' on a list of 'nothings' - probably not.

Where I am now has came to me only through being at University and for somebody seeing that I had potential to take on a PhD. I fear, I know, that we might not be able to retain that motivation - and perhaps I will fight a losing battle if it is against filling out my postgraduate 'satisfaction' survey (should PhD leave you feeling 'satisfied' like a good meal? At least it leaves you a strange form of curious/angry/angsty/anti-social - and I prefer that to 'satisfied') or using my PGCert in Higher Education coursework as an excuse to write critical essays about standardisation in the classroom. I would be more depressed if I was to simply tick the boxes. Education should make you feel excited/nervous/angry. 

So, what I suggest, and you don’t have to listen to me, I am just a PhD student - one which will graduate into a space where I have no choice but to support the corruption and decay of the university if I am to exist here in the next 18 months. If I am to be here, I need to have places where I can feel like I can have this conversation, this debate, not feel that I should be ground down into submission. That is why I will stand by my colleagues on the picket line, despite having no permanent contract to speak of, but I will not leave academia when I finish my PhD because one the best ways to fight it (so I hear) is to occupy it from the inside. What I do next? I have no idea. I'm ill and should be in bed. :-) (Although now I have a reading list as long as my to-do list so better get cracking...)